Journal of Psychology and Cognition

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +441518081136

Editorial - Journal of Psychology and Cognition (2025) Volume 10, Issue 2

Beyond the Brain: The Role of Sensory-Motor Systems in Language and Thought

Henry Stokes*

Department of Clinical Neuroscience Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm Health Care Services Stockholm Sweden

*Corresponding Author:
Henry Stokes
Department of Clinical Neuroscience Karolinska Institutet & Stockholm Health Care Services Stockholm Sweden
E-mail: henry.stk44@gnail.com

Received: 03-Mar-2025, Manuscript No. AAJPC-25-166660; Editor assigned: 04-Mar-2025, PreQC No. AAJPC-25-166660 (PQ); Reviewed: 18-Mar-2025, QC No. AAJPC-25-166660; Revised: 23-Mar-2025, Manuscript No. AAJPC-25-166660 (R); Published: 30-Mar-2025, DOI: 10.35841/aajpc-10.2.284

Citation: Stokes H. Beyond the brain: The role of sensory-motor systems in language and thought. J Psychol Cognition .2025;10(2):284

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Psychology and Cognition

Introduction

Traditionally, the study of language and thought has focused predominantly on brain regions such as Broca’s area, Wernicke’s area, and other cortical structures associated with higher cognition. However, emerging research in cognitive neuroscience and psychology reveals that language and thought are not confined to isolated brain modules alone but are deeply intertwined with sensory-motor systems. This shift in perspective—sometimes termed embodied cognition—posits that our bodily experiences, movements, and sensory interactions with the environment fundamentally shape how we think and communicate. This article explores how sensory-motor systems contribute to language processing and cognitive functions, broadening the classical view of brain-centric cognition [1].

Historically, language was viewed as a symbolic, abstract system localized in specific brain regions. The classical model focused on how the brain decodes and produces language through hierarchical processing. Thought, similarly, was often conceptualized as a purely mental activity detached from bodily experience [2].

Embodied cognition challenges this by arguing that cognitive processes—including language and abstract thought—are grounded in the sensory and motor systems that interact with the physical world. According to this view, understanding language involves simulating sensory and motor experiences associated with words and concepts. For example, comprehending the verb “kick” activates not only language centers but also motor areas responsible for leg movements. This suggests that language comprehension is partly a reenactment of the bodily experience linked to the meaning of words [3].

Neuroimaging studies provide compelling evidence for sensory-motor involvement in language. Functional MRI (fMRI) and electrophysiological data show that when individuals listen to or read action-related words (e.g., “grasp,” “run”), brain areas associated with planning and executing these actions are activated. This phenomenon, sometimes referred to as “motor resonance,” suggests that language understanding recruits the motor system to simulate the described actions internally [4].

Moreover, sensory areas are involved when processing language related to sensory experiences. Words describing colors, smells, or sounds evoke activity in corresponding sensory cortices, reinforcing the idea that comprehension involves sensory reactivation.

This sensory-motor engagement is not limited to concrete actions or perceptions but extends to abstract concepts. For instance, abstract metaphors such as “grasping an idea” may invoke sensorimotor circuits associated with physical grasping, indicating a metaphorical extension of bodily experience into abstract thought [5].

A key discovery illuminating the connection between sensory-motor systems and language is the mirror neuron system. Mirror neurons fire both when an individual performs an action and when they observe someone else performing the same action. This neural mirroring mechanism is believed to underlie our ability to understand others’ intentions, emotions, and actions—fundamental aspects of social cognition and communication [6].

Some researchers propose that the mirror neuron system is foundational to language evolution and acquisition. By internally simulating observed actions, early humans could have developed shared meanings and communication systems. Today, this system may still support language comprehension by linking observed gestures and speech to internal motor representations [7].

The embodied view extends beyond language to general thought processes. Our sensory-motor experiences provide a scaffold for abstract reasoning, memory, and problem-solving. For example, spatial reasoning often involves mental simulation of movement or navigation, engaging motor planning areas. Similarly, emotional experiences tied to bodily states influence decision-making and social cognition [8].

Embodied simulations enable humans to “ground” abstract ideas in concrete experiences. This grounding enhances memory retention, learning efficiency, and creativity by connecting new information to bodily states and actions.Recognizing the sensory-motor basis of language and thought has practical implications in education and clinical settings. Teaching methods that integrate physical movement and sensory engagement can improve language learning and comprehension. For instance, using gestures, role-play, and hands-on activities can enhance vocabulary acquisition and conceptual understanding [9].

In clinical contexts, therapies for language disorders such as aphasia increasingly incorporate sensorimotor exercises. Rehabilitation approaches that engage motor systems alongside language tasks have shown promising results in improving speech production and comprehension.Despite growing evidence, the embodied cognition framework faces challenges. Some critics argue that sensory-motor activation during language tasks may be epiphenomenal rather than causally necessary for understanding. Additionally, disentangling abstract thought from sensorimotor grounding remains complex, as not all cognitive tasks show consistent sensory-motor involvement [10].

Future research aims to clarify the causal roles of sensory-motor systems using techniques like brain stimulation and lesion studies. Advances in neurotechnology and computational modeling will further elucidate how embodied mechanisms integrate with traditional neural language networks.

Conclusion

Moving beyond a narrow focus on isolated brain areas, the study of language and thought increasingly embraces the vital role of sensory-motor systems. Language comprehension and cognition appear deeply rooted in the body’s interactions with the world, reflected in the activation of motor and sensory cortices during mental processes. This embodied perspective not only enriches our understanding of human cognition but also offers new pathways for enhancing education, communication, and rehabilitation. Ultimately, the brain alone cannot fully explain language and thought without considering the profound influence of the sensory-motor systems that connect us to our physical and social environments.

References

  1. Jimenez-sanchez M, licitra F, underwood BR, et al. Huntington’s disease: Mechanisms of pathogenesis and therapeutic strategies. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2017;7(7):a024240.

    2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Stoker TB, mason SL, greenland JC, et al. Huntington’s disease: Diagnosis and management. Pract Neurol. 2022;22(1):32-41.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Snowden JS. The neuropsychology of Huntington's disease. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2017;32(7):876-87.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Tabrizi SJ, Ghosh R, Leavitt BR. Huntingtin lowering strategies for disease modification in Huntington’s disease. Neuron. 2019;101(5):801-19.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Pan L, Feigin A. Huntington’s disease: New frontiers in therapeutics. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2021;21:1-9.

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  6. Tolosa E, Garrido A, Scholz SW, et al. Challenges in the diagnosis of Parkinson's disease. Lancet Neurol. 2021;20(5):385-97.

    7. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Lotankar S, Prabhavalkar KS, Bhatt LK. Biomarkers for Parkinson’s disease: Recent advancement. Neurosci. Bull. 2017;33:585-97.

    8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  8. Cabreira V, Massano J. Parkinson's disease: Clinical review and update. Acta Med Port. 2019 ;32(10):661-70.

    9. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Cerri S, Mus L, Blandini F. Parkinson’s disease in women and men: What’s the difference?. J Parkinsons Dis. 2019;9(3):501-15.

    10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  10. Opara JA, Ma?ecki A, Ma?ecka E, et al. Motor assessment in Parkinsons disease. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2017;24(3).

    11. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App